And as the sun quickly sets on the MSM empire, the WSJ morphs into the National Enquirer
They won’t stop, they can’t stop, they don’t want to stop, and why would they? Salacious allegations get clicks, salacious allegations about Trump get more clicks, and salacious allegations about Trump and Epstein are especially hot right now.
Thus, we have this from the once-venerable Wall Street Journal: some sort of alleged birthday letter written in 2003 (yes, that’s not a typo) that is supposedly a compilation from many people, including a note supposedly from Trump with a drawing of a naked woman and some sort of suggestion that he and Epstein have “certain things in common.” If – like me – you don’t have access to the WSJ, You can find details here and here.
Trump is planning to sue, and denies the allegations. They don’t even seem to be his style, but that doesn’t stop the WSJ. But because the WSJ and other papers are protected by Sullivan, it may be tough to prove actual malice or reckless disregard for truth, although I believe both are probably present.
Trump is of course the target, but will his supporters care a whit about this? I don’t think it is authentic, but that’s not even the point. I don’t care even if it is true; it was before Epstein was charged and it says pretty much zero. It’s such a transparent attempt to ride the Epstein furor, and I think the authors are not only trying to get clicks but also to reach some heretofore pro-Trump people and turn them against him. After all, the left and Democrats and many Independents already detest him, but his enemies sense blood with some people on the right who are incensed about what they consider an Epstein coverup (I’ve written several times recently about that).
What’s the WSJ got against Trump? Well, there’s this:
The Journal itself has been increasingly hostile to Trump’s agenda, with its editorial board regularly attacking his policies on tariffs, immigration, and other key issues. The editorial board has called Trump’s tariff plans the “dumbest tariff plunge” and warned his policies could be “the biggest economic policy mistake in decades.”
When the same publication that calls Trump’s economic policies “remarkably poor judgment” suddenly discovers a 22-year-old party invitation, we should ask whether this represents serious journalism or partisan opportunism.
I think it’s clear on the face of it that this is partisan opportunism. The story itself is meaningless and its only point is to smear Trump. It’s unsourced and unauthenticated and the paper doesn’t even seem to be claiming any due diligence in trying to find out:
Here’s what the Journal doesn’t tell you: They provide no evidence that this letter was authenticated. No handwriting analysis. No chain of custody documentation. No forensic verification. Just their word that they “reviewed” it among Justice Department documents.
If they just got it, and it was in “Justice Department documents,” my guess is the source may have been the recently fired Maurene Comey or one of her allies in the DOJ.
As for Trump, he’s also trying to release more of the previously-unreleased Epstein information from the Grand Jury. It won’t placate those who are out to get him; nothing will.
I just told my husband how much our WSJ subscription costs. He was astounded. He’s decided to wait for the quarter we paid for to finish and see how the WSJ is doing. He does read them for business news; as he is our very successful investment analyst, perhaps it’s worth keeping the paper.
Palazzolo, J. Someone will be along to tell us about him, and his priors which are about as unsavory as needs be.
I mean… yeah. But at this point there seems to be an air of desperation to it all. They’ve been trying to stop Trump for so long now, trying an failing, over and over and over and over like Lucy with the football I guess.
But with the revelations Tusi Gabbard just released, maybe we’re seeing the beginning of the end for The Resistance.
If Biden’s Justice Department had possession of this and didn’t use it before now, then it either didn’t exist or they knew it was a nothingburger. They did everything up to facilitating an assassination to stop him, but they decided not to release evidence that he was a pedophile? C’mon.
Nonapod- what revelations did Tulsi Gabbard just release?
We were riffling through the old papers of an elderly relation and among the items in the pile was a short note from…me! I had no memory of having written it (25 years ago). I do hope Trump hasn’t just forgotten it.
==
As for ‘not his style’, a Manhattan jury was capable of pretending that Trump would have given a 2d look to the likes of E. Jean Carroll.
Chris B, I’ve linked Gabbard’s releases in todays open thread.
I prefer the Daily Mail for it’s intellectual content and rigorous reportage.
sdferr; Chris B:
I have a post about the Gabbard thread, with links. See this.
NRO I agree again (someone check my pulse). They can’t stop, it’s almost become religious!
@neo: They won’t stop, they can’t stop, they don’t want to stop, and why would they?
These people have been fighting for their power, money, even their lives as they know them, since Trump was elected in 2016.
It’s just business, Sonny.
Wendy Comey just lost her nepo-job at the DOJ. PBS and NPR were just defunded. USAID dead and gone. The Dept of Education is on its way. Harvard and other top schools are under deep threats of losing funding. All sorts of investigations into the uber-corrupt Biden administration are in motion.
They’ve lost the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court. The MSM has lost most of its credibility. Likewise elite academia.
But they haven’t given up their dreams of tyranny, which they call “democracy” as did many states behind the Iron Curtain.
So what are they going to do? Be good sports and have a good think about how they need to change?
They are a long way from hitting bottom.
https://x.com/yashar/status/1946316846954668361
If they had real dirt on Trump they would have already used it. Therefore, it
Did. Not. Happen.
This is obviously manufactured ‘evidence’.
@sdferr
Palazzolo, J. Someone will be along to tell us about him, and his priors which are about as unsavory as needs be.
Yep, turns out his previous reporting experience was working for a magazine owned by the wife of none other than Glenn Simpson of….(wait for it!)….Fusion GPS!
Details at the link:
https://twitchy.com/samj/2025/07/18/so-the-wsj-reporter-who-broke-the-trump-letter-yeah-wow-n2415851
> because the WSJ and other papers are protected by Sullivan, it
> may be tough to prove actual malice or reckless disregard for truth
I don’t think that will be hard in this case at all: they don’t have the original, any proof and Trump and his team denied it seven ways from Sunday, and so on. And your article points out the actual malice.
Plus, we know Thomas is aching to turn over Sullivan, and maybe this will be the case that get get a quorum to overturn it. Since the suit is filed the Woke Street Journal is about to get to the FO stage.
Thank you NorthOfTheOneOhOne (it’s an unpleasant job but someone has to do it!).
A tad more unpleasant digging turns up his hand in the Stormy Daniels debacle as well: https://x.com/DaveColePhoto/status/1117916492106846208
Wonder what discovery will discover. Lots of “let’s get this expletive deleted”? Could be costly.
It’s important to note that the Journal’s editorial page and “news” pages are under different management. There’s no question that the “news” pages have morphed into a New York Times/Washington Post type partisan rag over the past two decades, but the editorial page remains conservative. You don’t have to be a Never-Trumper to believe that tariffs are bad (a position consistently taken by the editorial page).
Personally, I believe that the editorial page is mistaken in viewing tariffs as an economic policy (I agree that tariffs are bad economics). Rather, I believe that Trump views tariffs as a negotiating tool. Perhaps using this tool will flirt with bad economics–but Trump is a far more competent negotiator that the Obama (“don’t call my bluff”–which made no sense whatsoever in a negotiation) or Biden (“don’t”–how’d that work out?).
One definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. Perhaps we should give Trump the benefit of the doubt that his different approach may yield different results than the stunningly incompetent Biden obtained.
Trump did get SCOTUS to overturn Roe, this may be the vehicle to do the same with Sullivan, or at least lower the bar on reckless disregard. WSJ is very much open borders (cheap labor) so this is a merger of news and editorial.
Once again someone took aim at Trump and winds up shooting itself in the foot.
Trump opening himself up to the discovery process is going to be hilarious/delicious!
rbj1, please link to the open borders editorial from the WSJ.
Kurt G, do you actually believe there is anything juicy left on Trump that has never been found or made up before? Or that his supporters care about?
Even Wiley Coyote is smarter than you, bud.
And hes a super genius, these games have not gone well for abc or cnn